Article published In: Language Problems and Language Planning
Vol. 40:1 (2016) ► pp.69–84
Language education policy enactment and individual agency
The cauldron of conflicts in policy positions in implementing the Common European Framework of Reference for languages in Vietnam
Published online: 12 May 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.40.1.04van
https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.40.1.04van
This article explores language planning and policy from the perspective of individual agency and its embodiments in the process of implementing an English language education policy ensemble at a public university in Vietnam. The policy exemplifies the influence of globalized standards on local language education systems. It aims to build a national framework in Vietnam based on a Western model known as the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) which is expected to serve as a platform for reforming curriculum design, course materials development, and testing and assessment. Drawn from a set of data obtained through in-depth interviews with university administrators, the findings highlight the conflicting policy positions taken up by teacher-cum-administrators engaged in the policy enactment process. The paper argues that a critical barrier to CEFR enactment lies in the constraints and demotivation within each participant, particularly of those involved at a higher level of decision-making process in the institution. It is important, therefore, to deal with these conflicts at the level of macro policy planning to neutralize the paradox of policy enactment at the local site.
Keywords: Vietnam, policy position, individual agency, language policy, CEFR
References (27)
Baldauf, R.B., Jr. (2012). Introduction – Language planning: where have we been? Where might we be going? Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, 12(2), 233–248.
Ball, S.J.J., Braun, A., & Maguire, M. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2006). How is agency possible? Towards an ecological understanding of agency-as-achievement. Retrieved from [URL]
Braun, A., Ball, S.J., & Maguire, M. (2011). Policy enactments in schools introduction: towards a toolbox for theory and research. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 581–583.
Feryok, A. (2012). Activity theory and language teacher agency. The Modern Language Journal, 96(1), 95–107.
Gal’perin, P.I. (1992). The problem of activity in Soviet psychology. Journal of Russian and East European psychology, 30(4), 37–59.
Hamid, M.O., & Baldauf, R.B., Jr. (2014). Public-private domain distinction as an aspect of LPP frameworks: A case study of Bangladesh. Language Problems & Language Planning, 38(2), 912–210.
Honig, M.I. (2006). New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting complexity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Hu, G., & McKay, S.L. (2012). English language education in East Asia: Some recent developments. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(4), 345–362.
Johnstone, R. (Ed.) (2010). Learning through English: policies, challenges and prospects - Insights from East Asia. Malaysia: British Council.
Kelchtermans, G., & Ballet, K. (2002). Micropolitical literacy: reconstructing a neglected dimension in teacher development. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(8), 755–767. .
Louis, K.S. (1994). Beyond “managed change”: Rethinking how schools improve. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(1), 2–24.
Menken, K., & Garcia, O. (Eds.). (2010). Negotiating language policies in schools: Educators as policymakers. Florence, KY: Routledge. Retrieved from [URL].
Ministry of Education and Training. (2008). De an day va hoc ngoai ngu trong he thong giao duc quoc dan giai doan 2008-2020 [Project guidelines for teaching and learning foreign languages in the national education system in the period from 2008 to 2020]. Hanoi: Retrieved from [URL].
. (2014). Thông tư ban hành khung năng lực ngoại ngữ 6 bậc dùng cho Việt Nam [Circular No. 01/2014/TT-BDGĐT to issue a six-level framework for foreign language proficiency in Vietnam]. Retrieved from [URL].
Pham, H.H. (2001). Teacher development: A real need for English departments in Vietnam. English Teaching Forum, 39(4). Retrieved from [URL].
. (2006). Researching the research culture in English language education in Vietnam. TESL-EJ, 10(2). Retrieved from [URL].
Ricento, T.K., & Hornberger, N.H. (1996). Unpeeling the onion: Language planning and policy and the ELT professional. TESOL Quarterly, 30(3), 401–427.
Shoba, J.A., & Chimbutane, F. (Eds.). (2013). Bilingual education and language policy in the Global South. New York: Routledge.
Singh, P., Thomas, S., & Harris, J. (2013). Recontextualising policy discourses: A Bernsteinian perspective on policy interpretation, translation, enactment. Journal of Education Policy, 28(4), 465–480.
Wallace, S. (Ed.). (2009). A dictionary of education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from [URL].
Wee, L. (2003). Linguistic instrumentalism in Singapore. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 24(3), 211–224.
Zacharias, N.T. (2013). Navigating through the English-medium-of-instruction policy: Voices from the field. Current Issues in Language Planning, 14(1), 93–108.
Zhao, S. (2011). Actors in language planning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 905–923). London: Routledge.
Zhao, S., & Baldauf, R.B., Jr. (2012). Individual agency in language planning: Chinese script reform as a case study. Language Problems & Language Planning, 36(1), 1–24.
Cited by (11)
Cited by 11 other publications
Hurdus, Jeremy
Xu, Hao
Loo, Daron Benjamin & Aunyarat Jane Tandamrong
Gao, Yuan & Yaqiong Cui
Tran, Tran Le Nghi, Shuang Liu, Cindy Gallois, Catherine Haslam, Jolanda Jetten & Sharon Dane
Karabassova, Laura
Mohamed, Naashia
Ngo, Xuan Minh
Nguyen, Van Huy & M. Obaidul Hamid
Hurdus, Jeremy & David Lasagabaster
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
